what will actual, real life gun confiscation look like if/when the 2nd amendment is removed from the constitution?
Probably like the australian one but on a way larger scale…and a lot more violence. We've still got a million sks buried somewhere in the outback that cunts still use for hunting. Americans have a culture spanning well over 300 years and over 300 million guns in the country- and a lot more balls to stand up for what they believe in. The US NEEDS guns gone because they are on the verge of the biggest financial collapse since the great depression, and the government can't just nationalize absolutely everything if cunts everywhere answer with bullets.
>"hand in your guns"
>cue civil war that gubbermint can't win
Balkan War with a side order of Syria
My nipples are hard at the thought of such a thing.
Every /k/ommando in America will hand in their guns and run innawoods to eat cum brownies while the civil war rages around them. Even the boomer fudds and tacticool mall ninjas will make fun of them. Prove me wrong.
>when the 2A is removed
Hint: It never will be. They'll continue the slow boil. Pass a law, have a turn-in period. Maybe a registry if they're feeling frisky. Arrest a few people who weren't compliant. Have an amnesty period. Rinse and repeat. Continue to make arrests of those found to be in violation of the law. Pass another law. Rinse and repeat. First it'll be a mag ban, then deeper "assault weapon" restrictions, mandatory background checks, then semi-auto bans, caliber bans (goodbye .50 BMG), storage requirements, licensing requirements for certain types of guns, licensing requirements for all guns, gun purchase limits, ammo purchase limits, then tighten the screws on all of the above.
Pretty much exactly what they did with the 1934 NFA. Are there illegal machineguns? Yes. Do the powers that be sweat over them at all? No.
First by buyback, buybacks are moderately successful amongst the boomer and memelenial cucks. After that, they might try to confiscate the rest but I just don't see how that's viable. There's hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions, of Americans who are preparing for that exact situation where the feds try to take their shit. That's a lot of bloodshed and death for really nothing gained. There's somewhere around 300 million registered firearms, who knows how much unregistered firearms there are both legal and illegal.
I highly doubt there will be many cops/nasty girls willing to get shot and killed over taking a private citizen's AR baby killer, maybe if it was one or two confiscations and they were very well convinced because of "mental illness" or whatever the case might be, but a widespread confiscation there's no way.
I guess the most sensible confiscation is first by buyback, then by slowly increasing restrictions and what the fed can legally confiscate your firearms for. So it'd look like this. First they can take away your shit for domestic abuse or mental illness or flight watch risk, people will not object to that. Then it will be for "hate speech" or other thought crime, people will likely not object to that either. Then they will change the definitions of what hate speech and mental illness, sticking people they find to be "extremist" by using data from social media on the government no fly list, thus expanding gun restriction to a higher percentage of people and getting LEO support behind it.
My old prediction remains the exact same, nothing is going to happen. There would be buy backs and amnesties that some would take, but the majority of the 400 million guns in the US would not be turned in and their lessons from the 1990's is they can't go door to door to take them because they don't have enough men and morale. It'll be a law on the books that nobody will really enforce and many will simply not obey, they will sit and go "In like 70 years all the guns will be gone" and 70 years into it most of the guns will still be out there and the gun banners will go "Well, we'll just wait another 70 years, then we'll get it" and it'll probably be more like Finland where all those illegal unregistered war booty guns will just sit in the same closets and hiding places forever and never get turned in forever.
You've probably even heard some anti gun people lament that its too late for gun control in the US for civilian disarmament, there's simply far too many guns in the hands of far too many people who will never turn them in, with families that will continue to hold onto their guns for generations. They might pass a law just to sit on their hands. Its more likely there will be an upheavel, revolution, world war before civilian disarmament in the US would ever occur from age and attrition.
It'll either be >>622264 or >>622268, because the Feds know >>622265 is right on the button. They know full well they don't have enough bodies to throw into the thresher, not even if they drafted people to do it.
It would be to ballsy to outright repeal the 2nd. What would do is just ban shit until we're only allowed to have muzzle loaders
One important aspect of gun control that is often ignored but is very detrimental is outlawing self-defense, especially with guns. EU already has that, most other countries are even worse, which is one of the reasons their gun culture is so dead and guns are treated worse than ever and easily blamed by populists. Remember, gun control is not only about protecting government power, but about turning things that way so that government can keep and expand its job at "fixing" them.
It will be like little rock and the current situation on the border.
I see more dead democrat politicians than cops.
I'd find it very hard to believe that the commies would be able to outlaw self-defense. They'd have to do it federally because it'd be damn near impossible to regress self-defense laws in red states. However that is a valid point and something to consider.
When the goal is destabilizing the country to have people begging for help, outlawing responsibility and independence is the largest hurdle for multiple issues.
I thought you guys had guns in order to prevent exactly this kind of scenario?
New Yorkers will roll over and take it as always. The closest they ever came to actually doing something was during the soda ban. This law will take years to get past the Constitutional challenges though if it ever does.
So … "I wouldn't worry about it"? You do remember that they told the Bongs the exact same thing before every one of the cuckenings that have been unleashed on them, right?
A bunch of dead liberals.
I'll migrate to the US and join the local resistance group.
They'll confiscate them once the US is 10% white, so there'll be barely any resistance.
>Guns that don't meet the following criteria are now banned
>the ban criteria expands some more
>and then some
>repeat gradually until nobody bothers jumping through hooks for permits, or doesn't want to fuck around with muzzle loaders.
You don't outlaw self defence, instead you create some arbitrary bullshit like "excessive force" which can mean
>using martial arts against a gypsy kid with a crowbar,
>using a table leg against a nigger same size as you,
>shooting an unarmed home invader who didndu nuffins
>Stabbing someone bigger than you
That way you wouldn't jail someone for self defense, but you'd jail a violent sociopath for brutalizing urban youth.
Americans would gladly turn them in since they are a bunch of cucks.
The few people who might offer any resistance would be ratted out by their friends, family, and neighbors and end up with their house bombed.
There is no good end. We pretty much lost since we can't effectively fight back due to "muh PEE ARR".
>You don't outlaw self defence, instead you create some arbitrary bullshit like "excessive force" which can mean
Your point is well-taken Jakub, but some countries haven't even bothered with that route, and explicitly outlawed self-defense, saying that any bad goy has a "duty to retreat" from Abdul and Tyrone whenever they try to enrich his daughter.
No way that any true, red-blooded American would let the 2nd amendment be infringed upon. All the based right wing militias and constitution loving patriots would rise up in a rebellion that the government could never win, just like what happened when California banned guns, or when New York banned guns, or when those lovely folks at in the NRA agreed with all of those common sense gun regulations.
>t. dumb boomer amerifat
You people are delusional if you think the 2nd amendment will ever be repealed outright, and even more delusional if you think the people will rise up in rebellion as guns and accessories continue to be regulated on a federal level, or outright banned on a state level as steady over the next 50 years as they have been over the last 50. Even as hispanic immigration turns Texas and Florida to blue states like California and effectively turns America into a Leninist one-party state, offering welfare gibs to hispanics and blacks in exchange for votes and fueled by the GDP of a browbeaten white (and asian) minority, I don't think the democrats will ever be ballsy enough to outright appeal the 2nd. Especially as the consequences diversification lead to increasingly pro-gun attitudes among the white-minority.
America is fucked. We already lost.
Only way to save it now would be through nuclear war. That won't happen either.
(((red flags )))
>that's a red flag
>go to range
>another red flag
>not okay with homosexuals
molesting teaching schoolchildren
>burn down his house.
They dont need to remove anything. They just will do what they did last century - make more regulation and confiscate guns when they label you "mentaly ill" or "felon"
>continue implementing piecemeal restrictions until owning a gun means traversing an unnavigable hell of red tape and fees
>continue churning out propaganda demonizing firearms owners
>no new pro-gun youth since most of them think guns are evil, many of the ones amenable to guns never bother getting into them because of the restrictions, and most of the ones who do are only in it for sport and hunting rather than self-defense or politics
>wait for the existing pro-gun crowd to die so their anti-gun families sell, destroy, or turn in their guns
Tada, you have a disarmed country. Obviously there will still be guns, since gun control doesn't actually work, but that's perfect for the government. A disarmed country isn't one where no people are armed. It's one where the people aren't armed. If gun owners other than criminals are a fringe group, then they go from a threat against the government to a benefit. Once the propaganda turns enough of the population against guns, any failures of gun control can be redirected anywhere the government likes, since nobody will admit gun control doesn't work. Violence against women? Hate speech? Mental illness? You name it, they can use guns for it. Hell, a shooting that left only two dead over the weekend made international news because the shooter posted misogynist videos four years ago.
The only confiscations would be a few token enforcements of the slow-boiling regulations. And with those, even the cases of cops getting shot would only further the gun control. There wouldn't be enough for it to crush manpower or morale, and it would just give fodder to the propaganda, especially with each individual law being only a small tightening from the previous ones. A ban on semi-autos? You'd get some public support. Shooting grabbers over a reduction from a 10 round mag limit to 5? You'd go down as an overreacting psychopath who shouldn't have even had the five, because that particular restriction isn't a big deal and almost nobody sees the big picture. Or in cases like >>622348 where an individual is specifically flagged as dangerous, shooting the cops is just "proof" they were right to flag you.
>I'd find it very hard to believe that the commies would be able to outlaw self-defense.
Excessive use of force.
They did it in USSR (Russia). Killing somebody with weapon in self-dense only allowed if attacker has better weapons. Otherwise it is guaranteed murder charge and guilty verdict.
All that's needed to get your guns taken is for someone to call the cops and tell them you're a scary person. Jesus. That aunt better feel like a fucking cunt for getting that man killed.
Nah, she's clapping for the police and thinking of how great they are for removing that "dangerous" man.
They would never confiscate all at once. Slowly over a long period they would change the laws and minds of the people in order to take away what little is left peacefully without a fight
>Want to buy a gun
>Take self driving uber to LGS
>Hit 3 pedestrians on the way
>Go in gunshop
>See some posters on the wall about reasonable self defense
>"Are your possessions worth a person's life?" with a frightened, racially ambiguous youth clutching an xbox as a tall man with a shotgun looms over him.
>Browse the selection of break action shotguns muzzle loaders, and air rifles
>See nice SxS shotgun
>Decide I want it
>Go to clerk to purchase it
>He does a quick computerized background check
>"Uhh, your dopamine monitor indicates that you've never had sex. I can't sell you a firearm due to the incel terror act of 2022."
>Police get notified of my virginity
>They take me to the station and give me an ultimatum
>Undergo gender reassignment surgery or go to the FEMA incel detention camp
>"Are your possessions worth a person's life?"
Thats actually a good question
They'd probably chemically castrate you then ship off to work to death in the amazon warehouses. Or use you as a training dummy for the culture police
It's not even a question. If someone breaks in trying to steal my shit they're getting clapped
First one sounds worse. those autismo zogbots would do more damage than some lobomotmite working himself to death
Plus you know they'd make you fuck a tranny, or a fat nigger
I'd kneecap a stranger for a tangerine.
Basically this. They are counting on millenials to be just as cucked as their boomer parents and they will be zyklon b is wishful thinking. If all goes according to plan, complete gun confiscation won't happen in our lifetimes. It will happen 200 years from now after the population looks like the soypod humans in WALL-E except with more melanin
Frankly, if you know what the 2A says and means and you still remain in compliance with any law on the books whatsoever, you are a cuck. People in Wyoming don't get to look down on commiefornians when they still pay a $200 tax per silencer, worry about whether their riflespacepistol is in compliance with whatever ATF pulls out of its ass, and don't have the balls to geocache a drum full of unregistered ARs with giggle switches for shtf.
Despite all the edgy marketing and arfcom boomer tirades, firearm ownership is essentially just an expensive hobby in the US that you can show off on instagram. There is no group or politician that is going to change that. The only thing that changes is it is every firearm owner in the country deciding to tell ZOG to fuck off, but right now people are too fat and content and have far too much to lose.
Due to inflation caused by the third world i value life fairly low.
The subuman nigger kike who violates my property is hardly worth the buckshot used to dispatch him.
What are good ways of disposing of nigger burglars without them also staining the floors, walls or furniture with themselves?
Probably none since any effective method will cause plenty of bleeding
>not shooting whatever zogbots show up at your door and going out in a blaze of glory
Read the comment chain. >>622518 implies you will be arrested for the self-defense. In such a scenario, in which arrest is a given, >>622519 is right on the mark. Your scenario is one in which your arrest is not occurring and is sound advice in that scenario, but that wasn't the scenario originally proposed.
>what will actual, real life gun confiscation look like if/when the 2nd amendment is removed from the constitution?
They passed a law in Maryland that allows law enforcement total discretion to declare someone mentally ill with no evidence whatsoever and seize their guns. That means effectively the 2nd Amendment already is repealed in Maryland, because guns can be seized any time, anywhere, and for no reason at all–no evidence of any crime committed required.
Oh, and the law also allows relatives to claim (again, with no evidence) that a relative is mentally ill. Some bitch just did this to a guy, and cops went to take his guns and shot him. So, it's already happening. Guns are being confiscated right now, and they'll shoot you if you resist.
I believe it will involve analysis by computer. I believe troops will be sent out, and they'll be fucking stupid and just uphold orders. They'll know your sentiments, and on that basis alone they'll do the house search, and also require you to wear monitoring equipment.
Our only option, once that occurs, is to begin the fight, and also head for the hills.
But I believe we can save America, through a set of artful strategies, that will delegitimize the "elected" government, and give rise to military intervention, and a new order, one where individual civil defense is prioritized.
So if the US falls, what countries actually do have good gun laws?
Don't let it happen.
Don't run from problems, it will not solve anything.
>Become anti-gun propaganda
>posts picture of GI joe
>calling anyone else a cum-brownie eater
get fucked POG
prove yourself right
You're already positing a situation in which leaving the country is likely to result in you having more firearms freedom than staying. How much more anti-gun do you think it's going to get? If that's the path we're on we'll continue down it regardless of if you blat a few cops or not.
So basically the only solution is stockpiling guns and ammo while you still have the chance ?
This was the original post-election plan, goddammit.
>move to america
>wait for death
Then shilling for more "election threads" in other countries is what happened. Permanent revolution tripe that kept it from actually going forward.
Switzerland, depending on the state/Kanton. But I doubt they'll let a bunch of burgers in, based solely on "MUH GUNS!". Immigration to Switzerland is based on their need for certain jobs. If they don't need your profession, you're either not getting in or even going home.
On the other hand, their laws can be pretty savage. If you're from albania and a couple of other nations, who's citizens don't have a good track record, you're not getting a gun, end of story.
On the plus side, amassing a full giggle arsenal there is not that difficult or expensive as you buy the guns from manufacturers or any seller and not some 50yr old gun that has been abused as an investment because lol registry closed.As far as I know, in some Kantons only local PD has to sign off on your machinegun purchase, even if its a 11" suppressed full giggle beltfed AR15, although they'll give you a sideways look, because why buy an AR when you can have a Sig55X?
Thats just hearsay though, so take it with a grain of salt.
They have a very active shooting culture due to the whole 'conscripts take their guns home' thing. Nowadays they don't have to, but they can pay some cash to take their rifle home, so it is still an option.
Another country would be Greenland, as leaving home without a rifle there is just dumb. Plenty of hungry polar bears.
Finally, you have Poland and the Czech Republic, Poland with the option to upgrade your license to the point that you can own assault rifles. They have regular paramilitary training as well, in towns, as Polske Wal or so, where they fire blanks in full gear while the townsfolk watch and almost applaud. Its their WW2 resistance group, which has survived to this day as a network and regularly works with the army, its just extremely decentralized, to the point where its not really centralized at all.
The Czechs have a fairly liberal ( meaning free, not US-liberal, god fucking damn this shit, how the fuck did they get to change language so much? Fuck!) gun policy as well, lots of people go in to former Pact nations to go shoot guns and stuff.
Killing someone with a weapon is allowed if you could get seriously hurt or killed as well. If someone attacks you with a crowbar let alone a gun, you can just kill them on the spot and that will be a valid self-defense. If you got into a fist fight and you starting to have your face beaten into pulp and there's no signs that the attacker will leave you alone until after you die, you can shoot them too.
God this fucking "self defense is illegal" FUD is getting on my nerves, every fucking dipshit is parroting this when you can pretty fucking easily find evidence to the contrary.
Bro, it's not that self-defense is "illegal" or something, it's that if you get caught you've got extremely low chances to get out of it, even if the law is fully on your side.
>Article 37. Necessary defense
>1) Not considered a crime to cause harm to assailant while in the state of necessary defense, that is during protecting of the person and the rights of oneself or other people, governments' or people's protected interests, if such assault is accompanied with violence dangerous for lives of defending person or other people, or with threats of such violence.
>2) Defense from assault, not accompanied with violence dangerous for life of defending person or other people, or threats of such violence, is lawful, provided it is not in excess of reasonable retaliation, that is intentionally disproportionate response to a given situation.
>3) This article applies equally to all people, without respect to their professional or other type of training nor occupation, and without respect to their ability to escape assault or being able to call for help.
Do you know what's the reason why Russian courts have astronomically low acquittal rates for felonies and thatsuch? Because if the court acquits the defendant of anything, it is considered prosecutions' fuckup since that's the result of their failure to deliver a rock-solid case so the judge would have grounds to dismiss the charge. Then said prosecutors will have their assholes reamed to 1" above their current diameters by their superiors, and among other things like possible demotion, it means salary bonus cuts which constitute upwards of 50% of cops' salaries. So they have incentive to put you to jail because that would raise their bonuses and accelerate promotion. But they also have much stronger incentive not to put on you any charges that aren't already proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, for the reason outlined above. By the time the case goes to court, all charges are rock-solid and there's absolutely nothing to acquit one for. In effect, the court doesn't decide whether one is guilty or not (the prosecution had came up with all the evidence one could possibly need), only decides what punishment, out of prescribed for a felony, to apply.
This is all understandable but the system still incentivizes fabrication of proof and passing unsolved cases with already convicted people. They just have to send cases that have proof beyond some common limit that would filter them, so if you were unlucky enough to get caught and they had put enough data onto you the same situation as i mentioned above appears. It's just the same "do not get caught" thing, it just changes a bit from don't get into their arms' reach to don't let them hang any proofs, cases or crimes, whether you were guilty or not.
The cases that are "bound with white thread" get torn apart in court for that very reason. It's exceedingly difficult to put unrelated charges on a convict without losing a rank or two.
Well, i hope you're right. I would prefer to not take my chances though.
>Another country would be Greenland
Just no. It's so socialist that even the citizens aren't even allowed to own land.
At that point there won't be anything worth fighting for.
Don't think there's much to fight for as is. You grow up hearing about how America's super free and it's barely more permissive than eurozone. I don't think there's a single truly free country left in the world. It's all business and housing and grocery stores, conservation societies and pussies grabbing daddy government's pocket. Only place I can think of is the dead buttfuck nowhere in a hippie earthship that's not even on the fucking road map.
Not really, an actually good question is "Are my possessions worth your life?"
When you make a decision to steal something, you have just decided how much your life is worth to you. Personally I am not concerned with a theif's self worth, to any sensible person it is a matter of ammo cost vs item of mine being stolen. If you steal a pencil, not worth it. But anything more than 10 bucks is worth 5 rounds of $2 per shot ammo. And that's expensive ammo. Get some milsurp shit and you are good to go for a full mag dump to secure your nice toaster oven.
>>622492 You see Pole, thats why we dont have good gun laws.>>622493 We europoors are cucked into believing that others life worths more than our possessions…
Unless you're Swiss.
The law is clear, at least in this state, Castle Doctrine is the rule. If you're found within a dwelling or occupied vehicle that you were NOT invited into by the legally occupying residence or owner; nor you have a legal right to enter…it is assumed your actions are malicious in nature with intent to harm and the occupants and or vehicle owner have a right to pump your degenerate ass full of buckshot with lethal intent.
Many local departments will refuse to confiscate, many more simply won't due to the danger. Places that do would probably already be liberal hellholes, and so there might not be that much resistance there.
>ZOG commands US front line combat forces to fire on civilians
>they all defect
>ZOG is lefty with Navy and Chairforce
>no control over their own infrastructure
It would be anoodah shoah
No it isn't.
Nobody's life really has value, inherently.
What matters is rights.
You violate my rights by stealing my shit. That's my property, not yours.
Yes. A human life isn't worth that much really. I value some animals lives at more than a human because animals can't be disgusting degenerates.
>what will actual, real life gun confiscation look like
A gradual erosion of the classes of firearm you can have e.g. no guns without a bullet button because nobody will resist a minor tweak around the edges with older guns generally grandfathered in as machineguns were require registering etc but with Canada-style rules about grandfathering that make it really easy to seize and destroy them if the person is convicted of a crime or dies without specific instructions on what to do. Bonus points if you also come up with more weird laws about length and conversions to make it easier to convict people. This way you can slowly confiscate them as people who already hold them fuck up without causing an instant flashpoint. Anyone who doesn't want to hassle of registering them can have them purchased at full market price. Rinse and repeat every few generations and make sure any new advances in firearms are automatically prohibited so people are left with more and more outdated firearms. If there's a huge shift in technology as happens ever few centuries then civilians are at a large disadvantage.
Slowly limit who can actually sell firearms with tightening regulation. Do the same with ranges and pass laws preventing shooting on even private ground if it's within x miles of a city or town or even ban use outside of registered ranges and hunting entirely. This will lead to some areas being de facto gun free for anyone who doesn't make a huge effort to travel places to purchase and practice: if you don't have the disposable income to spend on both then you're essentially locked out of firearms 'culturally'. This is how it worked in Bongland.
Do something with ammo. Ban any new sort of ammo that comes in from civilian sales there's precedent here with 'armour piercing' ammo but think of the next step up from smokeless powder as a hypothetical example to feed into your goal of freezing civilian firearms at their current technology level or worse. If you can then eventually crack down on the actual production, purchasing and stockpiling of ammo be that through laws (need a license to purchase it, only x amount can be stockpiled without a valid reason or whatever) and banning the importation of ammo or better yet by informally leaning on manufacturers to align with your goals i.e. they should stop producing certain calibres, up the price, limit how much someone can purchase, develop new cucked types of ammo with degrading properties to stop stockpiling and so on. If you're slowly reducing stocks of civilian firearms in specific calibres through the use of grandfathering etc then naturally the ammo for them will become more expensive and eventually not worth producing at all. If reloading becomes a loophole to this then put heavy restrictions on who can purchase the equipment and the powder/primers define them as restricted explosives, that's already more or less an established concept under the NFA but it probably won't be necessary since that will be limited to a small number of enthusiasts anyway.
They've already established that being convicted of domestic abuse can have your guns removed, now you just need to expand it out to being accused as a precautionary measure already done with children then expand what categories of offence can result in this action. Women are more than 50% of the vote and are susceptible to this sort of thing. By the way this already applies if you have a restraining order against an 'intimate partner' and all it takes is a helpful incident or two to expand that to cover any restraining order.
Push all of the above with various 'tragedies', not just school shootings but imagine how useful something like another hurricane and the headline 'crazed veteran shoots rescue workers after refusing to temporarily hand over firearms'. Kebab attacks are also good. You can either manufacture them or wait for them to happen naturally and exploit them.
>if/when the 2nd amendment is removed from the constitution?
Why would they remove it when they can simply redefine it? The principle that certain classes of firearm are not protected is already established. Look at how Mexico gets around its constitutional requirement to allow gun ownership by having a single gun store in the entire nation.
You're an idiot if you think any modern government will make the mistake of giving people a single incident to oppose when they could simply play the long game. Each generation will tolerate the laws they grew up with and something a little bit more restrictive so you just have to keep on moving that window. Every restriction reduces the number of gun owners by a few % and the smaller that % gets the easier future restrictions become.
>forgetting the Czechs
Speaking of excessive force, what kind of weapon should I acquire to make sure whatever I hit never gets back up?
A gun. Preferably of a larger caliber.
Good advice, thank you friend.
A sledgehammer (if your house can accommodate an overhand swing), a large caliber firearm, maybe a shotgun, if you're a noguns or like to LARP a .50 lead ball musket will either eliminate your urban youth or at least create a smokescreen for you to reposition.
If you don't want to have only 1 shot but still like the idea of not only shooting nigs with antique designs but having smoke a ball and cap revolver gives you six shots of .45 or .50 with some models allowing for a cartridge conversion cylinders.
This. Its really easy to get a black powder pistol and convert it to use cartridges.
Is that the only picture you have on your computer? You do realise it's loaded with blanks, right?
Right, that's to keep from hurting people with it. Could be a fucking disaster with live ammo don't ya think.
Politicians are the best gun salesmen I know. You should see the line at Cabelas gun counter right now. The best way to ensure everybody has them is to talk banning them and just look how well outlawing good drugs worked. Illicit drugs would be dirt cheap if they were legal and less people would be interested in them.
You guys ever watch CIAlex Jones when he goes to the range, he can't ever find the safety to turn it off. Those range clips are hilarious to watch someone as inept as he attempt to sell a gun story. He reminds of Moe of the 3 Stooges. I like how he takes everyone else's gun away and shoots their ammo once they turn off the safety for him that shit is hysterically funny.
The gun you don't own? Yeah.
Please stop lurking my postings every time I get on this site. I mean really, who do you think you're fooling. Don't be so (((incoming pun))) triggered.
What? I've never responded to the four other fucking times you posted that image in irrelevant threads, this is my first time quoting you. I just noticed the pattern. Now I'm noticing some other, unrelated patterns.
>people are out to get me! (why?)
>if someone criticises me, they must have an ulterior motive
>using (((the echoes))) incorrectly
>le pun xD
You're from cuckchan.
I think it's a mentaller lad.
Euros have less restrictive laws in many respects than Americans. The only freedom America has that Euros lack is guns.
>Women are more than 50% of the vote and are susceptible to this sort of thing. By the way this already applies if you have a restraining order against an 'intimate partner' and all it takes is a helpful incident or two to expand that to cover any restraining order.
Wait a minute, the guns are gone too because you got #MeToo'd.
>I don't think there's a single truly free country left in the world.
There's an entire continent where law is barely enforced and it's yours for the taking, white man.
>The only freedom America has that Euros lack is guns.
That's not completely true; muh free speech is much better in burgerstan than Europe, for instance. And from what I've seen, the affirmative action-type laws are far worse in Europe than they are in the US at a federal level. But on economic terms you're absolutely correct, quite a few Euro countries are better than us in that regard.
>That's not completely true; muh free speech is much better in burgerstan than Europe, for instance.
Burgerland has absolutely no freedom of speech regardless of what the law claims. The government encourages a culture where people get deplatformed for wrongthink and provides mechanisms to make this happen, and then has the gall to say that isn't censorship.
Still better than in the EU.
How many years do you go to jail for questioning the holohoax in the US?
>There's an entire continent where law is barely enforced and it's yours for the taking, white man.
The western world would sacrifice their last soldier to keep evil nazis from oppressing innocent africans. Only the Chinese are allowed to do that because they can't be called white supremacists. Don't underestimate white guilt for colonialism especially in Europe. You permanently hear how we have to take up nigger rapefugees and send more gibs to Africa to atone for our horriffic crimes. I have no doubt you'd be facing an UN backed deployment of international special forces when you try to set up a white ethnostate in Africa.
You'd be better off in South or Central America or
Eastern Europe. At least I would expect some sympathies from locals there but it still won't be easy unless you keep a very low profile.
>Wait a minute, the guns are gone too because you got #MeToo'd.
Currently there's a test that the restraining order was at least issued under the pretence of a fair process but it wouldn't be difficult at all to weaken that. As I said the female vote is large and there's a lot of dumb faggots and even traditionally pro-gun baby boomer conservatives that would back changes if you labelled them as targeting ebul rapists.
>That's not completely true; muh free speech is much better in burgerstan than Europe, for instance.
True for pretty much all of Europe, since none have as strong a guarantee as the First Amendment or courts as autistic about upholding it.
>And from what I've seen, the affirmative action-type laws are far worse in Europe than they are in the US at a federal level.
False for all but a handful of nations, laws vary heavily because Europe is not one state yet. Affirmative action is an issue only in Sweden, Norway, Finland, Germany and France while in most other countries it's outright illegal it's supposed to be illegal in France and Sweden too but I'll explain below. One of the few non-retarded things going on in Bongland is not having quotas at all outside of taigs in the PSNI.
The French constitution supposedly bans this sort of thing but the government abuses loopholes like targeting residents of 'poor urban neighbourhoods' for special treatment which is de facto based on race. They also apparently have a quota system for the board of executives for companies.
Sweden actually got rid of its affirmative action policy because women are now so dominant in its universities that the policy started helping men instead. That means you can say it has the permanent threat of affirmative action starting up again if women drop below the ~60% they're at now. They also practice de facto affirmative action by abusing loopholes and dropping standards for things like the military stupidly for everyone but obviously for the benefit of women who couldn't pass the reasonable standards. Both of these are why they're included in the list.
the government doesn't encourage shit. private companies can do whatever they fucking like, and it just so happens that all of the platforms are owned by large, San Fran based companies.
Welcome to capitalism, where big companies do what they want. Learn to deal with it, faggot, or else start shilling for Communism.
>publicly owned, nationalised, government funded companies
You're fucking retarded.
>The government encourages a culture where people get deplatformed for wrongthink and provides mechanisms to make this happen
…Which is better than getting charged with a felony for a Roman salute. I did say "better," not great.
<monopoly through federal regulatory capture
<virtue-signalling in exchange for maintaining regulatory capture
<exclusive government contracts
<selling information they collect to alphabet soup
<HQ expansions get subsidized
>or else start shilling for Communism.
Sounds like you're doing that for us already.
If people forced the powers that be to panic by committing assassinations and blowing up infrastructure, they’d do it all at once. I’m not saying that it should be done, obviously.
This 100%. It did get the noggin joggin last week when that congressman said, "It'd be a short war. We have nukes." I had a hearty chuckle.
>Be decked out in battle rattle and evil black rifle, complete with all Yeager and Sootch gear.
>"We have nukes."
>All gun owners decide to march on Cali, NYC, and DC because liberal pewpew free zones will be tutorial mode easy.
>Military rains on Cali, NYC, and DC with B1s and B52s to try to stop us.
Nuke me. IDGAF! I'll be waiting at Times Square. :^)
This too. Reminder, 75% of the LEOs and troops are right wing.
>Reminder, 75% of the LEOs and troops are right wing.
Conservatives and neocons aren’t friends, they’re not going to give up their paycheck to protect you. The police are not on our side.
>Reminder, 75% of the LEOs and troops are right wing.
Reminder, they get paid 2x more than average person specifically so that they can't wrap their brain around your situation. Anything you do will look unreasonable to them, because they can't grasp the shit someone goes through on 20k a year.
I'm a POG and even I think you're a POG.
They've already passed a nearly identical law in Commiefornia.
they wont confiscate them, instead they ill do fake shootings and not solve the reasons why shootings occur which will lead to a moral panic of the mass populous. Those shootings will be an excuse to put more stringent laws as well as regulate the industry. Then they will fake pro 2 amendment terrorist attacks which trigger more moral panic, more regulation and more banns which, in the end will lead to the repeal of the second amendment. This will last for many generations, but with consistency and dedication will be successful.
the gave an oath to the constitution.
And if they break it, we shoot them in self defense. Oldest contract in the book.
>the gave an oath to the constitution.
Oh you’re right my bad, that has stopped everything anti-constitutional. I forgot that the president, Congress, and the senate have never taken oaths, which is why gun control and hate speech laws exist. I forgot that every witness in every trial in every courtroom has always told the truth under oath, because like every cop and the constitution, they all believe the bible and would never break an oath.
>meaning free, not US-liberal, god fucking damn this shit, how the fuck did they get to change language so much? Fuck!
I firmly hold the co-opting and corruption of the term "liberal" to be one of the scummiest things authoritarian leftists have ever done.
>the gave an oath to the constitution.
What event was the largest boost to the amount of recruits? 911 Tons of people went on to war when some sand niggers treaded on their country. Imagine the scale of desertion and sign up for the 'organized militia' when their own and clearly tyranical government / a pack of corrupt and power hungry politicians are treading on their own country.
Right like they’ve done with every ban so far, I remember the mass uprisings and the near uniform resistance by police to enforce the 94 assault weapons ban. I could name dozens of incidents where the police refuses to arrest someone for breaking a hate speech law and refusing to carry out confinscations.
>You'd be better off in South or Central America
The next Confederados.
To be fair, the 94 ban did not have gun confiscations and had a 10 year sunset period. They banned production of new guns and after 10 years, it went away due to it not making a difference in any way. The sunset clause was the only reason why it was put into law and people put up with that bullshit.
It will probably go down like these anons >>622268 >>622264 >>622265 predict. The actual question is, Will they have enough TIME to slow boil the country? It all depends on how bad things get on the social, political, or economic fronts and how quickly it happens.
or maybe a different way….
>painting your flag on the ground for people to step on
what the FUCK americans
>his city doesn’t paint fag and tranny flags on crosswalks so everyone can step and drive over them
Please nuke us
Fuck driving over them, scorched earth policy is best.
>what will actual, real life gun confiscation look like if/when the 2nd amendment is removed from the constitution?
<he thinks the 2nd will need to be removed for gun confiscation to start
>he doesn't know
Closer than the (((MSM))) says but it's significantly more than that. Close to, or surpassing 2 per citizen in the US.
>They dont need to remove anything
There will be significant regulations and hurdles to sell and create guns, which will cover individual creation too. That way they don't touch the area of purchase which is protected. It's already started with background checks. Age minimums going higher and higher. Within 10 years there will be suggestions of 25yo+ for age requirements.
That sexegenarian in Baltimore just got killed proving you wrong, and more will follow.
Not the Czechs, though. Also the Fins are pretty good because they have a lot of competitive practical shooting stuff.
I actually made love to that ground once.
A lot of dead pigs.
Some of us have diseases that'll kill us anyway.
Hope the idiots that come to confiscate plan on dying early, too.
As evidenced by the fact that in places like Maryland, the police will willingly execute "red flag" confiscations, and if the citizen and legal gun owner resists, they'll just murder him.
This is literally the kikes plan
Only good ZOGbot is dead ZOGbot
They won't have to confiscate. All over the country they are legalizing marijuana, so they can deny gun licenses to people who participate in recreational use as well as medical use. They are also confiscating.
Personally, I don't participate in any drug use, but it certainly is an ingenious way to take our guns.
The dumbing down of America.
That's clever, especially since potheads would rather lol blaze it than have 2A
Actually, I'd rather have both. If anyone has a problem with that, I'll either buy my weed illegally, buy my guns illegally, or both. Anyone who says you can have one or the other is a tyrant, and anyone who would trade the right to have one for the privilege of having another is a coward.
Subtle, it'll be all "well hurr durr" and all that bullshit. You'll do your patriotic duty and whatnot. I think a lot of you will probably put up a fuss but the gubberment will rise against you and those that used to serve will say that this is no longer right for civilians. You'll probably get a shitton of more laws and registrations. Many of you will go ahead and register. All of this will take place over say, 25 years. 25 years later, you'll still be able to register for a firearm but expect 10 jamal's to come knocking at your door once you get the papers because you are now on a list and guns are banned mmkay. Slowly does it right?
Another quality Austrlian post.
Gun confiscation is a buzz phrase for leftists. It's a way to get the real pacifist bleeding hearts to vote for your blue candidate. It will never happen simply for >>622259 reason alone. There will be a small percentage of people that will play along because they're "good people" then the rest will literally sit with their crosshairs on the door.
It's an empty promise that will never happen because it puts too much at risk for to little reward.
>here's my guns officers please dont shoot!
>lol ok but only if you hold your left foot with your right arm behind your back and crawl toward me
>heh look at this commie faggot resisting lawful procedure, fellow officers! not so lively now!
>"Are your possessions worth a person's life?"
They're worth the lives of all the niggers in the world
this picture triggers me everytime I see it and I hardly browse k
organized terroristic skirmishes and a lot of gang violence against the rich areas of town (that won't end) and a lot lot lot of dead cops and national guard for about 10 years.
It won't happen, it'll be a slow etching away of every freedom including speech and religion. It's an organized 100 year communist takeover, all they have to do to win is make sure no one gets hungry.
Niggers aren't people, mate. You know better than that.
>The US NEEDS guns gone
When did you become such a fucking pussy, Bruce?
All this ammo ain't for show.
Didn't know they had kikes in Australia.
>completely misunderstanding what Ausfag is saying
He's saying that the US government needs the guns gone.
>Gun owners are put on a registry.
>Government institutes "child safety tax", $100 a year to own as many guns as you want.
>Couple of years later it's changed to $20 per gun under a republican administration. The majority of gun owners own fewer than 5 guns so they celebrate this as a big step forward because in total they are playing a smaller gun tax.
>Exceptions are made for arms manufacturers, government agencies, and people who work for as an armed guard as the part of a licensed armed guard corporation.
>In unrelated news, what constitutes a "armed guard corporation" is put under strict regulation and it's extremely difficult to get the license required to run one.
>There's a case that's pushed under the rug where someone manufacturing a gun and publishing videos online is arrested for tax evasion. While he is in prison his ammo, firearms, and lathe are confiscated.
>Years later it's moved up to $50 per gun
>Over the proceeding years it's raised to $100, then $150, then $200, then $400, then under a democratic super-majority $1500 per gun.
>Over the years more and more people are arrested for "tax evasion" and have their guns and ammo confiscated after they are put in prison.
>Collectors, hordes, preppers, etc. are all hit the worst and either have to give up most of their guns or go to jail.
>Legal firearms are now primarily in the hands of the wealthy elite and the people who protect them.
>Criminals continue to own guns illegally, robbery and burglary rates increases as criminals realize that they have the monopoly on violence for basically every confrontation.
>The government uses the increase in crime to as an excuse to say "this is why you need to give us more power" and either increase the tax more or green-light some wasteful government programs that do basically nothing.
We definitely have them but you're not replying to one.
>just let thieves go unpunished, bro!
Tsarist Russia had free gun ownership and lax laws (hence weaponised sjws blowing up people) . Soviet Russia had total gun control, totalitarian slaver tyranny and criminalized self-defense. Check how many million people died of war, terror, disease or fled during a civil war that lasted longer and killed more than WW1 in-between.
well actually tsarist Russia didn't mind starving people to death for the profit and rebelling against such peasants were literally beating do death (standard punishment for low born rebels were like 500-1000 canes). So USSR didn't need to invent much they just continued RE practices.
Delete your post and rewrite it. You look like a retard.
Tsarist famine victims numbered in thousands in frigid shitholes people shouldn't even live in, before mechanized agriculture and chemical fertilizers. Soviet famine had 4 million dead hohols in the most fertile land in Europe, 4 million Russians and Kazakhs more. Previosly peasants were so happy to voluntary give away guns and food Tukhachevsky used gas artillery against villagers. Imagine US Army General Tyrone Watermelon nuking Kansas to get a hint at insanity used to take away Russian guns, bread and lives - in that order.
The minute the US revokes the second amendment the country will become another Sharia state in the style of Canadastan, where ISIS inspired shooters will begin killing white men and raping white women at leisure because nobody will be able to oppose them as everyone will be unarmed.
>Gun owners are put on a registry
>D.C. burns like Paris
The pseudo-registration bullshit they already do for muh background checks is already too much.
TLDR; No 80% lowers or blank receivers, No advertising of lowers and blank receivers, No parts kits that could be used to make a blank receiver into a semiautomatic gun or machine gun. pic related one of the niggers cosponsoring the bill.
>the Consumer Product Safety Act (15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(5)(E)), the following shall be considered banned hazardous products under section 8 of such Act
>(1) A firearm receiver casting or firearm receiver blank or unfinished handgun frame
>(2) An assault weapon parts kit.
>(3) A machinegun parts kit.
>(a) In general.—It shall be unlawful to market or advertise, on any medium of electronic communications, including over the Internet, for the sale of any of the following:
(1) A firearm receiver casting or firearm receiver blank or unfinished handgun frame
2) An assault weapon parts kit.
(3) A machinegun parts kit.
>the term “assault weapon parts kit” means any part or combination of parts designed and intended to enable a consumer who possesses all such necessary parts to assemble a semiautomatic assault weapon;
> the term “machinegun parts kit” means any part or combination of parts designed and intended to enable a consumer who possesses all such necessary parts to assemble a machinegun or convert a firearm into a machinegun;
>the term “semiautomatic assault weapon” means—
>a semiautomatic rifle or semiautomatic shotgun that has the capacity to accept a detachable ammunition feeding device; or
>a semiautomatic pistol that has—
> the capacity to accept a detachable ammunition feeding device; and
>any one of the features described in subsection (b);
>Put a gun up for sale
>Take the gun apart and throw the parts into a box
>Put the box full of gun parts up for sale
Whoa there, don't you know that's dangerous? Don't you want to protect consumer safety?
Anti-gunners place some magical importance on manufacturers' serial numbers. The whole point of this is to stop home builds that don't have one.
no they dont. they know wha ttheyre doing and what theyre doing is chipping away at the second amendment. dont underestimate your enemy
You mistake me. Of course they're chipping away, and I didn't say they weren't. They are choosing this route because of the whole "ghost gun" thing. The whole contention is serial numbers. Look up the anti-gunners take on "ghost guns". The part that scares them most is how they're "untraceable" without a serial number. The parts kit bill is an attempt to prevent such home builds. I never said it wasn't an infringement, and I'm offended at the accusation.
What's scarier black salt rifles or ghost guns?
Plus black markets and underground gunsmithing / gun manufacturers at home and abroad will keep guns supplied.
black salt ghost rifles, obviously.
They're taking people's guns because at the same time they're passing dark-age laws like criminalizing bestiality. They don't want you to have guns in your possession when they start handing out death sentences for wearing unironed shirts and forgetting a word of the national anthem.
I wonder what website this stupid nigger thinks he's on.
It will look something like this.
>criminalizing bestiality is "dark age"
What the fuck?
So you don't think it's a problem people are fighting bestiality instead if fighting forest fires? Smokey says it doesn't matter what website we're on if you dumb as fuck everywhere.
It's a law designed to punish people the law doesn't like, who can't be pinned on any real crime, with any measurable harm or victims (keeping in mind that it isn't necessarily forcible rape, bestiality just means 'sex with an animal', which is discussed in the Christian Bible - Mary was an animal fucker). It's a form of social control, by the group presenting themselves as the moral authority. That is very "dark ages". Ages ago it was the church, now it is the government.
Subtract your personal moral objection to that specific behaviour and replace it with any other that you or a large demographic would find abnormal and taboo. For example, look at unproved accusations of pedophilia in the last five years skyrocketing, with people often getting convicted on nothing. Should people be legally punished for homosexuality? A foot fetish? Smoking after sex? These could all be labeled as degenerate behaviours, but how do you draw the line at what is 'too' degenerate, and what is acceptable to punish people for?
Unless you can establish an objective standard as an answer to this problem, then we run into an ethical issue because otherwise, it will literally be people being stoned for damaging someone else's feels, over an issue based on faith and not logic. That's a pretty stark cultural definition of the period we call the "dark ages".
You're really not going to get traction promoting bestiality on this board, especially via pilpul arguments like that. You're either kikes or you are unwittingly using kike debate tactics.
Heh, and the kikes wonder why they always historically ended up expelled. Clearly expulsion hasn't permanently solved the underlying problem though—as long as they exist, whites will continue to have to deal with this kind of thing.
You trying to impress god fag? Banning bestiality and figuring little boys gets you a ticket to heaven.
That's all these people want to do is take, take take. Confiscate this and confiscate that. That's all they know how to do they don't have real job skills and they make up every excuse from anything just so they can take everything away from everyone and not have to lift a finger to make it.
What people want to have sex with animals? Sex isn't taking anything but count on the lazy piece of shit to use sex as an excuse to take guns away from people. Guns arent the only thing they want to take.
What's wrong nigger white? You afraid if free white with guns because they would blow your fucking jaw off?
>legally punished for homosexuality?
>smoking after sex
If you're smoking current year cigarettes you should be shot for being a retard.
Oh I'm a kike but you lying excuses to steal the clothes off my back? That's the way you do it? You're lower than a kike there's no better place for you than being ground to dust pig.
>things that never happened.rtf
Try learning some reading comprehension before you post, you bluepilled bootlicker.
>source on the first is the 'Library of Hate'
Totally scientific and unbiased.
>second assumes all homos are men
>>>/tv/1745984 why would anyone hate someone like him.
>Oh I'm a kike but you lying excuses to steal the clothes off my back?
No lies here, kike. We don't even want anything from you, per se. You're quite free to keep the clothes on your back when we put you in the mass grave.
>denies his original argument is pilpul
You can go in the mass grave too.
You don't even know what the word 'pilpul' means, and you are only using it as a cop-out to avoid having to actually express a meaningful opinion or stance. You know that the accusation you're making is empty and flawed, but you make it not because you actually have any good faith in the strength of your belief, but instead because you don't believe you can respond thoughtfully at all. Like most /pol/ Jews in denial, you're a philosophical zombie afraid to speak honestly because that would require you to face up to your inability to contribute to real discussion.
We will not countenance your pilpul arguments intended to lead to fallacious conclusions based on false equivalence and abuse of semantics. The fact that you are advancing the arguments you do is, ipso facto, proof you deserve liquidation. We've seen what your ilk has done, first to the Weimar Republic, and now to this country.
OMG I knew it you're those freaks who release farm animals from their pens because you're afraid a false kike is going to dyke them.
Fuckin ALF doesn't know what a kike or an animal is.
Is this just shitposting? No functioning human being could be missing the point this badly for this long, by accident. I don't even know how to respond to this, because you have yet to present any point that is possible to respond to. It's like you don't even comprehend your own words.
>There's a law
>Person breaks law
>Therefore laws are dumb and should be abolished.
fucking genius. It's not the constitution's fault that the government is shit. It's the US people's fault for being pussies and not violently overthrowing them as soon as they broke their oaths. Just because the man on watch was asleep, doesn't mean guard towers are shit.
The "point" you are trying to make is utter kikery. This is standard pilpul that intentionally attempts to lead to ludicrous / degenerate conclusions (c.f. "accept bestiality in society because otherwise it's a dark age, goyim!") via iterative abuse of semantics and appeals to various logical fallacies.
For the other streloks in this thread, this kind of pilpul is what lead to most of the judicial abuses of the Constitution in the 20th century, starting with Wickard v. Filburn where the Supreme Court decided that intentionally *not* engaging in interstate commerce, on one's own property, in a single state… was, in fact, interstate commerce. "You see, goyim, by not engaging in the interstate commerce, you potentially affect the prices in interstate markets. Therefore, not engaging in interstate commerce is itself also interstate commerce." nevermind that we just asserted A = NOT A in an argument, which violates basic logic and therefore allows us to "prove" whatever we want, goys This decision opened the door for the federal government to "constitutionally" regulate every aspect of our lives and is the basis for all the federal gun control laws you know and hate.
Streloks, learn to recognize kike arguments like this. When the conclusion they try to get you to accept is absurd, recognize that. Reject their argument. Avoid engaging in debating their semantic tarbaby positions—uncle Adolf said it best in pic related.
We will purge these kikes someday.
Literally nowhere, by anybody, was it ever even slightly implied that bestiality was normal or that it should be socially acceptable. The only thing I said was that creating laws against it when it is:
>an extremely rare occurrence
>in most cases a victimless crime
>when it does cause harm, already falls under sexual assault and animal abuse laws
>only pushed as a law to cause moral schism in society, virtue signalling to pretend legislators are 'doing something' to improve the world while real, important issues are ignored and intentionally worsened
>not endangering to society in any way unless someone brings harm to another person's property, which as stated before, is already illegal and always has been
… and so on - I could continue, but if you're any kind of honest or reasonable you should understand by now - is obviously wrong. These are laws designed to attack people and stack charges in courts over unfalsifiable accusations. You are openly and knowingly supporting a legal system that is doing everything in its power to legislate you out of existence and create more and more phony ways to control or crush you, and you don't care as long as 'this law doesn't affect me' or your personal bread and circuses aren't threatened.
Spamming the word 'pilpul' over and over and over again does nothing to reinforce the fallacious and intellectually dishonest position that you're trying to enforce, does nothing to make your strawman any less incorrect, and does nothing to change the fact that you are repeatedly saying fucking nothing and pretending that in doing so, you're making some profound observations about the argument. You're calling me a Jew to deflect away from the fact that every single word you've said has been nothing except for the things you accuse me of, while you can't substantiate your accusation whatsoever.
Logic and reason will always defeat your cowardly, supernatural LARP angles, and nobody is fooled by you pretending you're NSDAP.
Millions and millions of people will hand them over when faced with the reality of their wives and kids being collateral damage in a gunfight.
The thousands who resist will be killed and painted as crazed, far-right psychopaths by the media in a propaganda campaign designed to terrify the remaining populace into handing over all of the rights they have left.
>"Uhh, your dopamine monitor indicates that you've never had sex. I can't sell you a firearm due to the incel terror act of 2022."
>sudden argument about bestiality
I'm not wasting my time reading any of this and neither should anyone else, absolutely kike tier
>remove second amendment from the Constitution.
<good luck with that
Or, what will happen is Johnny Norperton will get killed refusing to hand over his guns in the suburb and the ATF/other agencies will kill his 12 year old daughter and 6 year old son in the crossfire. Agents/officers with a heart will feel gutsick about the whole thing, no matter how hard the media tries to spin it that "it was Norperton's fault his children died" it won't quell the anger people will have over dead kids from angry moms and the like, whole thing will backfire. Don't you understand why Waco and Ruby Ridge were absolute disasters?
Not only don't they have the sheer numbers of men for gun confiscation, they lack the morale to get killed on a regular basis and kill innocent civilians and their kids and collateral damage. Most of all even many gun controller supporting people will lose their stomach fast. The same faggot losers who pussied out of Vietnam will pussy out of killing enough Norpertons. The faggots who want gun control and hate violence will hate the violence gun confiscation causes. This irony is alone enough to stop the whole thing from happening, it will be exactly the opposite effect you think it will be.
The people who think gun confiscation in the US would go well just don't understand the entrenchment, the people with and against them, the politics, the nature of the beast. Still others think that Mount Everest is a big hill because they can see it all from the helicopter taking video on one screen, not knowing how big it really is.
They don't really plan on gun confiscation for many reasons, primarily the fact they know they can't spin the murder of thousands of innocent kids and civilians the way they want.
By Allah (blessed be his name) it is worth their hands.
the brass tacks of their current step is meaningless, they're working to an end goal, complete removal. their techniques aren't "make sensible incremental steps to our end goal," they propagandize and lash out at any open direction. fighting them on technicalities is missing everything.
Never gonna happen, and if it does, Civil War part 2, electric boogaloo
Municipal zogbot and former nasty girl here. I unfortunately have to side with those calling bs on “our boyzinblue and state sanctioned militias wouldn’t do that.”
Yea, there are kommando lads present in both, and yea, the majority are right wing and support 2a. However, NG is mostly 19yo faggot retards who will jump on any excuse to suit up in their hand-me-down desert storm era IBA and go GET SOME, and most cops aren’t going to give up their fat pension; unless they feel it truly is wronging the population (including themselves and their families), or it’s a losing battle and their risking too much of their life/pension anyway.
And we all know that first caveat won’t happen. It’ll be rolled out and controlled in such a way to appear like the greatest thing for humanity since pocket pussies. Look at states with domestic violence laws where the female can say they got beat up with no supporting evidence, and dudes getting a knock on the door to turn all his shitty fudd rifles and keltecs in. That’s widely accepted as totally okay.
All I know is I won’t be the one on the other side of the door when people start shooting. There’s plenty of other jobs out there that pay just as well, with the benefit of not being absolutely despised by anyone that isn’t a boomer.
But tbh, even if the rest were likeminded and refused to participate, I’m sure plenty of liberal faggots would scab in the name of justice as newly appointed transitional peacekeepers. At least they’d be an even worse shot than the current employee base.
They'd take them a little at a time via red flag raids. And everyone else would clap.
The US is dead. Only thing that'll save us now is getting nuked.
He's saying the Jews need them gone, not that he wants them gone.